Abstract

BackgroundContrast-enhanced (CE) steady-state free precession (SSFP) CMR at 1.5T has been shown to be a valuable alternative to T2-based methods for the detection and quantifications of area-at-risk (AAR) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. However, CE-SSFP’s capacity for assessment of AAR at 3T has not been investigated. We examined the clinical utility of CE-SSFP and T2-STIR for the retrospective assessment of AAR at 3T with single-photon-emission-computed tomography (SPECT) validation.Materials and methodsA total of 60 AMI patients (ST-elevation AMI, n = 44;  non-ST-elevation AMI, n = 16) were recruited into the CMR study between 3 and 7 days post revascularization. All patients underwent T2-STIR, CE-bSSFP and late-gadolinium-enhancement CMR. For validation, SPECT images were acquired in a subgroup of patients (n = 30).ResultsIn 53 of 60 patients (88 %), T2-STIR was of diagnostic quality compared with 54 of 60 (90 %) with CE-SSFP. In a head-to-head per-slice comparison (n = 365), there was no difference in AAR quantified using T2-STIR and CE-SSFP (R2 = 0.92, p < 0.001; bias:-0.4 ± 0.8 cm2, p = 0.46). On a per-patient basis, there was good agreement between CE-SSFP (n = 29) and SPECT (R2 = 0.86, p < 0.001; bias: − 1.3 ± 7.8 %LV, p = 0.39) for AAR determination. T2-STIR also showed good agreement with SPECT for AAR measurement (R2 = 0.81, p < 0.001, bias: 0.5 ± 11.1 %LV, p = 0.81). There was also a strong agreement between CE-SSFP and T2-STIR with respect to the assessment of AAR on per-patient analysis (R2 = 0.84, p < 0.001, bias: − 2.1 ± 10.1 %LV, p = 0.31).ConclusionsAt 3T, both CE-SSFP and T2-STIR can retrospectively quantify the at-risk myocardium with high accuracy.

Highlights

  • Contrast-enhanced (CE) steady-state free precession (SSFP) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) at 1.5T has been shown to be a valu‐ able alternative to T2-based methods for the detection and quantifications of area-at-risk (AAR) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients

  • In 53 of 60 patients (88 %), T2-STIR was of diagnostic quality compared with 54 of 60 (90 %) with CE-SSFP

  • In a head-to-head per-slice comparison (n = 365), there was no difference in AAR quantified using T2-STIR and CE-SSFP ­(R2 = 0.92, p < 0.001; bias:-0.4 ± 0.8 ­cm2, p = 0.46)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Contrast-enhanced (CE) steady-state free precession (SSFP) CMR at 1.5T has been shown to be a valu‐ able alternative to T2-based methods for the detection and quantifications of area-at-risk (AAR) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. An attractive feature of CE-SSFP is that it can be performed in the intervening time period between contrast administration and acquisition of LGE images This obviates the need for additional T2 acquisitions and reduces the total duration of CMR exams, which is important in AMI patients [13]. Given the growing use of 3T and well-known signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) benefits, which can be traded off for imaging speed or higher-spatial resolution, we investigated the capacity of 3T CE-SSFP against commonly employed T2-STIR for the retrospective determination of area at risk (AAR) in patients with AMI based on SPECT validation

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call